America...Too Cocky?

[RXS]

Sonic Goo' date='Mar 26 2006, 12:17 PM' post='42905']

RXS: If you think researching something is like a popularity contest, I'll explain it for you very slowly. Look for 'astrology'. Now look for 'debunk astrology'. Which gives more results? Does that mean astrology is true? And another thing, peabrain. Of course you'll get arguments against the sanctifying of Reagan from people who don't like him. Do you think www.ilovereagan.com would have that kind of info? As for poisoning the well – that's what YOU just did.

Hey Slackjaw....I never called you any names in this thread until now. And while I don't believe in Astrology, there are others that do, so I guess it's a matter of perception. You could do the same thing with God or religion. Just because you don't believe in Astology or God, doesn't mean that it's not true.

 

Sonic Goo' date='Mar 26 2006, 12:17 PM' post='42905']

Do you think www.ilovereagan.com would have that kind of info

 

Do you think www.ihatereagan.com would have that kind of info? There are a whole helluvalotta places you could have gone to get better info than that.

As far as poisoning the well, I am very familiar with it, as you do it all the time. By the very definition you just posted, your prior post qualifies for poisoning the well....and you did it first. You just hate being beat at your own game. Don't hate.

[Moody]

Sonic Goo' date='Mar 26 2006, 10:17 PM' post='42905']

 

Hey Knix, have you stopped beating your wife yet?

 

 

What did I miss.....

 

[[TNT] Sonic Goo]

RXS, please point out what information I unjustly disqualified because of what background of that source. And yes, I think if you're looking for criticism of a popular positive perception, I think www.ihate....com would more likely have that than www.ilove...com. Surely anyone can see the logic behind that?

 

(Moody, I'll explain the wifebeating thing later )

[Eliteone]

The name calling............... I see Goo presents facts, others counter, names fly from both sides. Why can't you debate minus the namecalling?

 

Dissenter's paradise thread is for that.

 

Anyhow on with the debate (a good debate is healthy )

[[FF5]Knix]

Ok back from vaca.

 

I'll respond to Goo boy later on. Not sure if he has done crying his tears to the mods in hear yet.

 

I do not beat my wife Goo Boy. However with your personality, and social/political cowardice, I can guess what you beat .

 

I have to go back to work, in a real job, that pays real money, and doesn't require me to say, "Did you try turning off your computer from your computer tower yet?"

 

More to come.........

[Belladonna]

Silly me, I thought things were going along okay in this topic and I didn't need to check it every day.

 

KNIX and Goo and everyone else, keep your insults to each other out of here. I'm sure you're more than capable of explaining your point of view without making things personal. That's a cheap and unimpressive tactic.

[[FF5]Knix]

Its because he goes to sites that fit his arguement, and link them. Claps...good work. What other tricks to you do? You get out of bed to piss on any accomplishment the US has ever done or will do. You are **edited by Bella**. If I saw you in front of me, I would beat your **edited** butt within an inch of your life. But alas I'm not that lucky...so lets go about being boring and linking biased crap...

 

http://www.slate.com/id/2102081

 

Here was Gorbachev speaking at a session of the Politburo in October 1986, days before he traveled to Reykjavik, Iceland to offer Reagan a groundbreaking disarmament plan, including a 50 percent reduction in nuclear arsenals. If he didn't propose these cuts, Gorbachev told his colleagues:

 

[W]e will be pulled into an arms race that is beyond our capabilities, and we will lose it because we are at the limit of our capabilities. … If the new round [of an arms race] begins, the pressures on our economy will be unbelievable.

 

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/939984/posts

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_Reagan

Foreign policy and interventions

 

Reagan, left, in one-on-one discussions with Mikhail Gorbachev, the General Secretary of the Communist Party of the USSR from 1985 to 1991.Reagan forcefully confronted the Soviet Union, marking a sharp departure from the détente observed by his predecessors Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, and Jimmy Carter. Under the assumption that the Soviet Union could not then outspend the US government in a renewed arms race, he strove to make the Cold War economically and rhetorically hot.

 

The administration oversaw a military build-up that represented a policy named "peace through strength", a name which hearkens back to the strong foreign policy of Teddy Roosevelt and the expression "Speak softly and carry a big stick". The Reagan administration set a new policy toward the Soviet Union with the goal of winning the Cold War by using a strategy outlined in NSDD-32 (National Security Decisions Directive). The directive outlined Reagan's plan to confront the USSR on three fronts: economic - decrease Soviet access to high technology and diminish their resources, including depressing the value of Soviet commodities on the world market; military - increase American defense expenditures to strengthen the U.S. negotiating position and force the Soviets to devote more of their economic resources to defense; and clandestine - support anti-Soviet factions around the world from Afghani insurgents to Poland's Solidarity movement, which also received extensive support from George Soros and the Holy See. He proposed the Strategic Defense Initiative, dubbed "Star Wars", a space-based missile shield, widely viewed outside the US as a threat because it would nullify the Soviets ability to assure their end of "mutually assured destruction"--it would theoretically allow the US to execute a first strike and avoid the resulting Soviet retaliation; the prospect of losing parity in the arms balance that underpinned the world strategic situation and Soviet military power greatly distressed both the leaders and people of the USSR. In October 1986, Reagan met with Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev in Iceland where Gorbachev ardently opposed this defensive/offensive shield. On March 11, 1990,Lithuania, lead by newly elected Vytautas Landsbergis, declared independence from the Soviet Union and was followed by other Soviet Republics and by 1991, the Soviet Union was officially dissolved. Margaret Thatcher said, "Ronald Reagan won the Cold War without firing a shot."

 

 

See this stuff is easy Goo. Get some sites to back your opinion. cut/paste. I know why you like robots now, you argue just like one.

[Seemann]

the best generals of WWII were Russian, trying to rewrite WWII history, blah blah blah. Ring a bell?

 

Nahh! Next that you'll say is that USA won WWII, won't you?

[[FF5]Knix]

Ok Seeman..I'll bite. Who won WW2? The allies were made up of the US, CCCP, England, and France, with support from various other nations, vs the Axis of Germany, Japan, and Italy. Is there something I missed? Not saying we won it by ourselves, but just as in WW1, France, England, and Russia were having a tough time of it, until we threw our hat into the ring. (Yes I know you guys went and had yourself a little revolution soon after the start of WW1).

 

 

[Seemann]

USA participation concluded into

1.Err..how's that in english... well the bill when USA gave us some technique as credit without percents. Most of those who passed the war from beginning till end didn't see any of that technique though.

2. You would probably name the creation of second front. Ha! You (as well as english) didn't create it when we really needed it(btw, what's the official reason?). It was created when germany was already almost down to stop the expansion os the SU.

Tell me, do you Really believe that USA helped a lot during the war?

Man, the war didn't start from disembarcation of the allies in Normandia.

And don't mention Japan, it didn't cost a lot of trouble, and was only for american interests.

Of course i don't say that allies did nothing, but you always exagerate your contribution to the war so much.

[[FF5]Knix]

1) I have no idea what you are trying to say here, you may wish to refer to a dictionary. No joke, really lost me.

 

2) Creation of 2nd front? Uh yeah we came from the west and South. Russia came from the east. What do you mean when you really needed it?

 

3) Japan was not a big deal? Well I think a billion Chinese may disagree with you on this point.

 

Russia lost more soldiers then anyone, from any country during WW2. The only thing that saved the nation was a brutal winter which cut off supply lines ffor the Nazis, and froze there asses off.

 

No US in WW2, no victory for the allies, bottom line...

 

We did no more, or less then our allies did, including the CCCP.

 

 

[Seemann]

When in 1941 you(ow, not usa, churhill) was ASKED to create the second front because CCCP forces suffered a lot, he did't because of 'lack of forces'. It was created only in late 1943, when the power was on SU side and SU began to enfree Europe. As to France, what was their contribution? Most time they were under occupation(trying to resist though).

As to japan, i meant it wasn't big deal FOR AMERICA. What did you loose? Well, pearl harbour, yes. And than 2 a-bombs and no fighting (actually i admire this very smart move).

So USA helped in the war only when USA needed. And well, that's fair.

I wonder what in your opinion was the key battle in the WW2?(Short definite answer is wanted)

[[FF5]Knix]

Are you serious? only Pearl Harbour? Dude it was a crushing blow to our Navy. All the fighting we did in the SE Asian Islands? Midway? Iwojima?

 

The only reason why we dropped 2 A-bombs, was that this was our last recourse short of invading Japan. The Japanese mentality would fight to the last man, women or child. Millions could have been killed. The Japanese were training common non fighting citizens with bamboo sticks, and teaching them to strap bombs to themselves to Kamakazee the invading US soldiers. Trueman decided to drop 2 A bombs, to force the Japanesse into surrender, lest as I mentioned 100,000's if not millions of people would be killed if we had to invade Japan. So yes it was a "big deal"

 

While there were many members of the French government who readily aided Nazi Germany, they also had a large populous fighting to repel the Germans. The combined efforts of Canada, England , and the US during the Normandy invasion, I feel was the most important battle, and biggest turning point of WW2.

 

 

[Seemann]

1.well, i might have been wrong about japan.

The combined efforts of Canada, England , and the US during the Normandy invasion, I feel was the most important battle, and biggest turning point of WW2.

As i expected. No further use in discussion. I started to speak about that because one guy told me that all USA people think that they won the second World War.I wanted to check it, and now i'm sure it's true.

[Lodingi]

When in 1941 you(ow, not usa, churhill) was ASKED to create the second front because CCCP forces suffered a lot, he did't because of 'lack of forces'. It was created only in late 1943, when the power was on SU side and SU began to enfree Europe. As to France, what was their contribution? Most time they were under occupation(trying to resist though).

As to japan, i meant it wasn't big deal FOR AMERICA. What did you loose? Well, pearl harbour, yes. And than 2 a-bombs and no fighting (actually i admire this very smart move).

So USA helped in the war only when USA needed. And well, that's fair.

I wonder what in your opinion was the key battle in the WW2?(Short definite answer is wanted)

 

gotta love the communist education system.

 

 

i meant it wasn't big deal FOR AMERICA. What did you loose? Well, pearl harbour, yes. And than 2 a-bombs and no fighting (actually i admire this very smart move).

 

 

no fighting? you call over 1,000,000 americans killed or wounded no fighting?

 

 

When in 1941 you(ow, not usa, churhill) was ASKED to create the second front because CCCP forces suffered a lot, he did't because of 'lack of forces'. It was created only in late 1943, when the power was on SU side and SU began to enfree Europe.

 

 

freed europe? um, didn't your forces occupy the so called land you freed for 40 or 50 years?

 

 

As i expected. No further use in discussion. I started to speak about that because one guy told me that all USA people think that they won the second World War.I wanted to check it, and now i'm sure it's true.

 

 

well seeing that we were on the winning side..........i'd say we won.

 

[Spacko]

well seeing that we were on the winning side..........i'd say we won.

 

Think twice before questioning the logic in that one, Seemann

[Seemann]

no fighting? you call over 1,000,000 americans killed or wounded no fighting?

Well, if to compare it with USSR losses...

[RXS]

Well, if to compare it with USSR losses...

Reminds me of a quote....

 

"No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country.

He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country."

- General George Patton Jr

 

 

[[FF5]Knix]

Reminds me of a quote....

 

"No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country.

He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country."

- General George Patton Jr

 

Ahh Gen. Patton... "Old Blood and Guts"

 

That guy was one intense individual.

 

Would love to see any conversation between Patton and Macarthur....talk about Dissenter's Paradise

[Lodingi]

Well, if to compare it with USSR losses...

 

 

who's comparing? you made a dumb comment and i simply called you on it. silly boy.

[Seemann]

Do you have at least the slightest idea of how many soviet people laid their lives in Stalingrad, Kursk, Leningrad... more than 40 million is only official statistics. Corpses are still being found every day. and your 'million' which i couldn't find anywhere is less than 3% compared to USSR losses. I personally wouldn't call it a big deal.

[Natter]

If young people still think this way...

 

<---this it's good for

[[FF5]Knix]

Do you have at least the slightest idea of how many soviet people laid their lives in Stalingrad, Kursk, Leningrad... more than 40 million is only official statistics. Corpses are still being found every day. and your 'million' which i couldn't find anywhere is less than 3% compared to USSR losses. I personally wouldn't call it a big deal.

 

 

Hey Goo, do you want to say anything on this topic, or are you just saving yourself for me?

 

Seemann it is one thing to be ignorant, with the possability of future knowledge. The above statement is bordering on plain stupidity.

[HowitzerAL]

Do you have at least the slightest idea of how many soviet people laid their lives in Stalingrad, Kursk, Leningrad... more than 40 million is only official statistics. Corpses are still being found every day. and your 'million' which i couldn't find anywhere is less than 3% compared to USSR losses. I personally wouldn't call it a big deal.

 

Hey Seeman, as the proud child of a WW II Prisoner of War for the last year of the war (stalag Luft IV), And a nephew to an Uncle who gave his life on D-Day( My Mom's oldest Brother), I must take offense to your ignorant comments. You make it seem as if your country was the only one to suffer casualties. EVERYBODY lost someone or something from this. Stop being an ingrate like another country that will remain nameless...**cough cough France * cough cough...If you want to start "quoting" history, lets talk about how Hitler lost complete confidence in all his field Generals, and took complete control over all the ground troops, was overwhelmed, and made countless incorrect decisions that changed the outcome of some of the more decisive battles in WWII...While we ALL know he was a madman, if he had let his people in charge at the time make decisions, the outcome of the war would had been drastically different....

 

 

One last thought, If not for the involvement of the U.S., the U.K., and countless other countries, you would be speaking German right now.....So stop insulting everyone else who laid their life on the line for you and all of Europe, by claiming sole victory in WWII. Its insulting......And incorrect.

 

AL

[Seemann]

My great-grandpa also died somewhere under Kursk. And if not UK and USA Whole europe would be speaking russian.

and what exactly is incorrect in my post, Knix? Tell me so that i could find it out...

 

I don't want to offend anyone and i don't say that only the country that doesn't even exist now won the war. Allies were a lot of help, but they joined in when victory was just a matter of time.

And how can you call me ignorant if you consider normandian fights most turning point in the war? Of course because of different education systems we thimk that we won, and you think that you won,(and actually everybody won, including Germany) but do you realize that if the enemy wasn't stopped in russia, Europe would drown in blood?